Kalifornia silliness...

Bobby Hogg said:
Not always. Some homosexual men are just born more effiminate, some homosexual women more masculine. Why say "very stereotypical?" I didn't say "all" I said "can have."
Click to expand...

I stand corrected.

BH said:
Also, male homosexuals have been observed to have one section of the brain (that thought to be reponsible for artistic or creative thinking) significantly larger than in heterosexuals. That's a physical characteristic.
Click to expand...

However, it cannot be seen by the naked eye. If it can't be seen, then it can't be initially discriminated.

BH said:
Additionally, white skin is little more than an abnormal version of black skin.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's an adaptation to the lack of intense sunlight, and not an abnormality.

BTW...how did this turn into a homosexual thread? Perhaps somebody has an agenda...
 
Gato_Solo said:
BTW...how did this turn into a homosexual thread? Perhaps somebody has an agenda...
Click to expand...
Yes, a very hypocritical one right here....

Gato said:
Just because you, personally, don't like something, it doesn't give you the right to take it from me.
Click to expand...
 
Gato_Solo said:
Once again..Nobody is taking anything away. It was never given in the first place.
Click to expand...
People were born into slavery in this country. Since they were never given freedom in the first place I guess there was nothing wrong with the inequality.

Besides there are bans where there didn't used to be. That would indeed be taking away what was was once given.
 
flavio said:
People were born into slavery in this country. Since they were never given freedom in the first place I guess there was nothing wrong with the inequality.
Click to expand...

And just because they're ancestors were free doesn't matter either, right? :rolleyes: Also...what has that got to do with homosexuality? NOTHING.

flavio said:
Besides there are bans where there didn't used to be. That would indeed be taking away what was was once given.
Click to expand...

Like this handgun ban? Once this gets to the US Supreme court, it won't stand a chance.
 
flavio said:
People were born into slavery in this country. Since they were never given freedom in the first place I guess there was nothing wrong with the inequality.
Click to expand...


Broken record. He's not going there. Think maybe you can find a new strategy?

Gato said:
BH said:
Not always. Some homosexual men are just born more effiminate, some homosexual women more masculine. Why say "very stereotypical?" I didn't say "all" I said "can have."
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

These same traits happen regularly in heterosexuals too.
 
Gato_Solo said:
And just because they're ancestors were free doesn't matter either, right?
Click to expand...

Wow, so now denying priviledges is based on what priviledges ancestors had in another country? That's one hell of a stretch.

Also...what has that got to do with homosexuality? NOTHING.
Click to expand...
Clearly your statement...
"Just because you, personally, don't like something, it doesn't give you the right to take it from me."

...doesn't apply if you're the one doing the taking.
 
flavio said:
...doesn't apply if you're the one doing the taking.
Click to expand...

Sorry, empty argument there. They are asking to be given something they can already do. The choice of partners is the problem. I can't marry a man & neither can Rock Hudson. Look, no discrimination.
 
Gato_Solo said:
However, it cannot be seen by the naked eye. If it can't be seen, then it can't be initially discriminated.
Click to expand...

Remains a physical characteristic nonetheless.

Gato_Solo said:
Actually, it's an adaptation to the lack of intense sunlight, and not an abnormality.
Click to expand...

How do you explain ginger people then? What good are they?

Perhaps homosexuality is an adaption to the evolution of culture, resulting in the greater breeding potential of people with creative personalities.
 
Gato_Solo said:
Once again...this is not a race issue. It's a personal choice issue.
Click to expand...
No it's not. But I'll play along again, you would you support denying priviledges based on the personal choice issue of religion I suppose then?
 
flavio said:
No it's not. But I'll play along again, you would you support denying priviledges based on the personal choice issue of religion I suppose then?
Click to expand...

If that church forbids marriage, then yes.
 
Gato_Solo said:
If that church forbids marriage, then yes.
Click to expand...
You would support the government denying Catholics priviledges based on the fact that they are Catholic? Incredible.
 
flavio said:
You would support the government denying Catholics priviledges based on the fact that they are Catholic? Incredible.
Click to expand...

I'll tell you what's incredible...the amount of trouble you will go through to put words in peoples mouths that have nothing to do with what they said...
 
Gato_Solo said:
I'll tell you what's incredible...the amount of trouble you will go through to put words in peoples mouths that have nothing to do with what they said...
Click to expand...
Well go ahead and clarify. It certainly seemed like you approved of denying people priviledges based on your approval of their lifestyle choice.

Certainly goes against this....

Just because you, personally, don't like something, it doesn't give you the right to take it from me.
Click to expand...
But then that's based on what priviledges your ancestors had in another country right?


 
flavio said:
Well go ahead and clarify. It certainly seemed like you approved of denying people priviledges based on your approval of their lifestyle choice.
Click to expand...

Once again...for those who refuse to remove the blinders from their eyes...There is a difference between race and choice. There is also a difference between a right and a priviledge. You wish to equate each with the other every time. They are not, and haven't ever, been the same thing. When you can get past that one area which you refuse to learn, you will be heard again. Until then, I'm done debating you because you have no facts...just contradiction and opinion. I'm sure you'll take this opportunity to claim victory, but those who can see what I'm saying will know that that claim is false.
 
Bobby Hogg said:
I'm quite happily ignorant about guns.
Click to expand...


I wuv my assualt rifle (AR-15) with six 30 round Mags

and If some expatriate Algerian 'youths' came 'round
and wanted to burn up my car

I'd get the Wife to keep thumbin' rounds into the mags
from my 2,000 round stash of ammo...


"shoot to thrill

playin' to Kill!"
 
Gato_Solo said:
Once again...for those who refuse to remove the blinders from their eyes...There is a difference between race and choice.
Click to expand...
Use religion then, still won't make you valid.

There is also a difference between a right and a priviledge.
Click to expand...
Use priviledge then. Still won't make you valid.

By your logic it would ok for the government to deny people priviledges based on their choice of religion.

those who can see what I'm saying
Click to expand...
Yes, everybody can see what you're saying "Just because you, personally, don't like something, it doesn't give you the right to take it from me" doesn't apply if Gato's the one that doesn't like it and is doing the taking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top